Court allowed bail to the applicant, an elderly man accused of an offence under Section 377 IPC, citing lack of evidence, no criminal history, and over two months of custody.
Applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to standard conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 22 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3821 of 2018 Applicant :- Kedar @ Kedar Nath Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhaskar Bhadra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against Kedar (applicant) alleging that they assaulted Sumit s/o Sompal and has carnal intercourse against the order of nature.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present matter. Entire prosecution story is false and fabricated. Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant is 65 years old. Prosecution case is not supported by any independent evidence. Applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 6.11.2017 (more than two and half months) and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Kedar @ Kedar Nath involved in the Case Crime No. 670 of 2017, under Section 377 IPC, P.S. Hafizganj, District Bareilly be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5.The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 2.2.2018
A. Singh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail in a case involving Section 377 IPC.
Whether the length of custody and lack of criminal history justify bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kedar @ Kedar Nath
State Of U.P.
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
